Multi-bit feedback protocol systems and methods

- Aira Technologies, Inc.

Multi-bit feedback protocol systems and methods are described herein. A method can include correcting, by a sink, an error in a data packet using a multi-bit feedback protocol, the data packet being transmitted over a wireless link to a sink by a source; determining that the multi-bit feedback protocol has failed; and reverting back to an automatic repeat request protocol when the multi-bit feedback protocol has failed.

Skip to: Description  ·  Claims  ·  References Cited  · Patent History  ·  Patent History
Description
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation-in-part of and claims the benefit and priority of U.S. application Ser. No. 17/556,155, filed on Dec. 20, 2021, which claims the benefit and priority of U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 63/131,268, filed on Dec. 28, 2020, each of which are hereby incorporated by reference herein, including all references and appendices cited therein, for all purposes as if fully set forth herein.

FIELD OF THE PRESENT TECHNOLOGY

The present disclosure pertains to the technical field of wireless communications, and more specifically, but not by way of limitation, to systems and methods that improve wireless communications using multi-bit feedback protocols.

SUMMARY

According to some embodiments, the present disclosure is directed to a method comprising correcting, by a sink, an error in a data packet using a multi-bit feedback protocol, the data packet being transmitted over a wireless link to the sink by a source; determining that the multi-bit feedback protocol has failed; and reverting back to an automatic repeat request protocol when the multi-bit feedback protocol has failed.

According to some embodiments, the present disclosure is directed to a device comprising a processor; and a memory for storing executable instructions, the processor executing the instructions to: correct an error in a data packet using a multi-bit feedback protocol, the data packet being transmitted over a wireless link to the sink by a source; determine that the multi-bit feedback protocol has failed; and revert back to an automatic repeat request protocol when the multi-bit feedback protocol has failed.

According to some embodiments, the present disclosure is directed to a method comprising correcting, by a sink, an error in a data packet using a multi-bit feedback protocol, the data packet being transmitted over a wireless link to the sink by a source; correcting the data packet using a correction algorithm, the correction algorithm being executed over a stored data packet; determining any of: expiration of a timer as additional correction packets are transmitted to the sink; and/or when additional correction packets that are transmitted by the source are unresolvable; and retransmitting the base transmission when the additional correction packets are unresolvable or the timer has expired; determining that the multi-bit feedback protocol has failed; and reverting back to an automatic repeat request protocol when the multi-bit feedback protocol has failed.

According to some embodiments, the present disclosure is directed to a method comprising reverting from a multi-bit feedback protocol to an automatic repeat request protocol upon failure of the multi-bit feedback protocol and when any one or more occurs: a data packet is confused as a correction transmission when the data packet is a base transmission; a correction phase for correcting an error in the data packet introduces additional errors; and/or a divergence in a correction algorithm occurs.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Certain embodiments of the present technology are illustrated by the accompanying figures. It will be understood that the figures are not necessarily to scale and that details not necessary for an understanding of the technology or that render other details difficult to perceive may be omitted. It will be understood that the technology is not necessarily limited to the particular embodiments illustrated herein.

FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of an example wireless environment where aspects of the present disclosure can be practiced.

FIGS. 2A and 2B depict a flowchart of an example method of a multi-bit feedback protocol.

FIG. 3 is a flowchart of another example method.

FIG. 4 is a flowchart of an example multi-bit feedback protocol method.

FIG. 5 is a flowchart of an example method for dealing with divergences.

FIG. 6 is a schematic diagram of an exemplary computer system that is used to implement embodiments according to the present technology.

 DETAILED DESCRIPTION Overview

Wireless protocols include a set of rules or agreed-upon guidelines for communication. These rules are used in the design of hardware and software that governs data transmission over the air. One example wireless protocol includes BLUETOOTH, although the present disclosure is not limited to application to BLUETOOTH protocol.

When a device is transmitting data packets over a network according to a protocol, errors may be introduced due to attenuation in the wireless channel. One method of identifying and correcting these errors involves the use of a cyclic redundancy check (CRC). CRC is a short error-detecting code to detect accidental payload changes. CRC is computed on the payload at the transmitter side (Tx), and attached to the end of the payload. Both payload and CRC are transmitted to the receiver (Rx). At the receiver, the received CRC is compared to the CRC computed by the received payload. If the received CRC equals the computed CRC, the CRC passes. If the received CRC doesn't match the computed CRC, the CRC fails.

When CRC passes, it is of a very high probability that the packet is error-free, so the Rx can transmit an acknowledgment (ACK) to the Tx, to inform the Tx to continue to transmit the next packet. When CRC fails, it is of a very high probability that the packet is contaminated, so a no-acknowledgment (NACK) is triggered. When the Rx asks for retransmission using the NACK. In sum, when the Tx receives ACK, it will transmit the next packet; when the Tx receives NACK, it will re-transmit the packet. The transmission of ACK or NACK messages to a transmitter is a simple form of feedback that includes 1-bit of data, referred to as single bit feedback protocol.

While these methods can be used, there are technical problems that arise with their use. BLUETOOTH protocol, currently, implements a single bit feedback system. The feedback is one-bit information that only indicates whether a packet is received correctly or not. The feedback is exactly one-bit information (timeout is also a bit of information or packet not received correctly). Overall, with single-bit information feedback from Rx to Tx, the Tx cannot do anything other than re-transmit the entire packet. When the received packet has only a few bits error, it is not efficient to retransmit the whole packet again.

In traditional BLUETOOTH systems, any error in the received packet results in discarding the entire packet and there is no further processing. For protocols that implement feedback schemes, a data packet that is determined to have errors can be corrected or otherwise processed. In some instances, the header of the data packet includes a redundant protocol byte that indicates if the error packet received needs to be processed as a base transmission data packet or a correction packet. If the received packet is a base transmission, the packet is retained for correction in future retransmissions. If the received packet is a correction packet, the packet can be decoded and a correction algorithm can be executed to process the base packet that was previously stored.

Processing of the received packets in a system that implements a feedback protocol has the following issues. The base packet, when retransmitted, can be confused as a correction packet. Another issue can arise during a correction phase of the algorithm, where additional errors can be introduced due to retransmissions in the correction phase. Another issue may arise when there is a divergence in the correction algorithm and the Tx decides that there is no further correction needed when in actuality the packet received by the Rx has errors.

In some instances, a multi-bit feedback protocol is built as an extension over the current BLUETOOTH automatic repeat request (ARQ) protocol. In these instances, the Rx sends an ACK only when a base payload is successfully received. Correction packets are exchanged with a NACK at the baseband and are processed by the multi-bit feedback system. Any acquisition loss results in retransmission in accordance with the standard BLUETOOTH protocol and the multi-bit feedback system handles duplicate correction packets.

If the feedback link completely breaks down for some reason, the system falls back to BLUETOOTH ARQ system due to retransmissions triggered by the source. Any flush timeouts in the system may result in a reset of the multi-bit feedback system. If a reset occurs, the Tx and Rx move on to the next packet.

Example Embodiments

Turning now to the drawings, and to FIG. 1, which is a schematic diagram of an example wireless environment. The environment may include a transmitter 102 (also known as a source), a receiver 104 (also known as a sink), and a wireless link 106. In some instances, the transmitter 102 and receiver 104 are configured to use a BLUETOOTH protocol to communicate with one another over the wireless link 106.

That is, each of the transmitter 102 and the receiver 104 are configured to use BLUETOOTH protocols, and specifically, the multi-bit feedback protocols disclosed herein. That is, rather than using single-bit feedback as is known in the BLUETOOTH protocol, the transmitter 102 and the receiver 104 can be configured to use a multi-bit feedback protocol which is built as an extension over the current BLUETOOTH ARQ protocol. Multi-bit feedback involves the generation and transmission of error bits identified between received and transmitted data packets. That is, when errors are identified in a received data packet, error positions corresponding to those errors can be transmitted rather than a simple ACK/NACK. The error positions can be transmitted as an index in some embodiments. A device can use the error positions to correct the errors identified in the received data packet. The method can include a step of receiving, by the transmitter encoder, a received packet that comprises errors. The method includes an iterative or cyclic error correction process that can involve one or more rounds of error correction. A first round of error correction can comprise a step of generating an index of the error correction, the index comprising error positions for the errors. The method also includes a step of transmitting the index on the forward link. The method can include a step of generating a corrected packet using the index. This can include deindexing the index and correcting the error bits. Again, the index indicates the location of bits that require flipping. The receiver decoder can flip bits in the received packet according to the error positions in the index to generate the corrected packet. In some embodiments, the feedback system can automatically revert from a multi-bit feedback protocol to an automatic repeat request (ARQ) protocol upon failure of the multi-bit feedback protocol.

Both the transmitter 102 and the receiver 104 each comprise a processor and memory. The memory stores instructions that can be executed by the processor to perform the various methods disclosed herein. In some embodiments, both the transmitter 102 and receiver 104 are each configured to perform improved multi-bit feedback methods as disclosed herein.

FIGS. 2A and 2B collectively illustrate an example method of the present disclosure performed within a multi-bit feedback system. The method can include a step 202 where a receiver Rx sets a data packet counter numRx. A determination is made in step 204 if a data packet is successfully acquired or not. If the data packet is successfully acquired, the method moves to step 206 where a CRC is evaluated. In this step, a determination is made as to whether the received data packet that was acquired in step 204 has any errors. If the data packet has errors, a protocol header of the data packet can be extracted in step 208. This step can also involve comparing the protocol header of the data packet to a feedback protocol byte included in the data packet to prevent the data packet from being confused as the correction transmission (e.g., correction packet).

If the feedback protocol byte is verified, the method can move to step 210. It will be understood that step 210 is reached when the data packet successfully passes the CRC in step 206. Step 210 includes executing ARQ for the data packet. If the ARQ passes, the method moves to step 212 where an acknowledgment (ACK) is generated. If the ARQ fails, the method moves to step 214 where a payload length analysis occurs. If the determination in step 214 indicates that the payload is empty (e.g., payload length is zero), the method can move to step 216 where a NACK message is generated and retransmission of the base transmission (e.g., originally transmitted payload) is requested. It is noteworthy to mention that a NACK is generated in step 214 when the header extraction step 208 fails, and/or when the payload is empty. In either of these instances, a retransmission of the base transmission is requested.

If the determination in step 214 indicates that the payload is not empty (e.g., payload length is NOT zero), the method can move to step 218 where the feedback state is set to true, and a step 220 where the payload is extracted. In step 222 a Feedback based correction process is executed. If the Feedback based correction step passes, the method can revert to step 212 where an acknowledgment (ACK) is generated. If, on the other hand, the Feedback based correction step fails, the method can move to step 224 where a NACK is generated. However, this NACK is associated with a request to transmit a correction packet/transmission, rather than the base packet/transmission.

When retransmission of the base packet has been requested in step 216, the method can move to step 226 where there is a determination made as to whether the request for retransmission of the base packet meets or exceeds an ARQ threshold. The method can also move to step 226 from step 224. As will be discussed herein, the ARQ threshold can be based on a timer or a count of messages. For example, the transmitter Tx may have been asked to retransmit the base packet a threshold number of times or has been asked to send a threshold number of correction packets. When this limit is encountered, the method can include a step 228 of resetting the NPP Turbo (e.g., flushing the source) and indicating to the transmitter Tx that it should move on to transmit a next base packet (e.g., a new data packet). Thus, when a multi-bit feedback process becomes unresolvable, rather than getting stuck in a never-ending loop, the method allows for a break in the retransmission of packets. The transmitter Tx moves on to transmitting a new packet when a prior packet is unresolved. In step 230, if the threshold has not been met, the transmitter is allowed to transmit either a base packet or a correction packet, depending on the circumstances.

As noted above, the multi-bit feedback protocols disclosed herein are built as an extension over the current BLUETOOTH ARQ protocol. In some embodiments, a receiver Rx transmits an ACK only when the base payload is successfully received. That is, the ACK is only transmitted when a data packet comprising a payload is (1) successfully received/acquired; (2) the payload passes a CRC check; and (3) the payload of the data packet is successfully extracted.

In the event that an error is detected in payload and a correction is requested, any correction packet is exchanged with a NACK at the baseband (e.g., transmitter Tx) and are processed using the multi-bit feedback protocols disclosed herein. In some embodiments, any acquisition loss results in a retransmission of the base packet/transmission in accordance with the BLUETOOTH protocol. The multi-bit feedback protocols are configured to handle duplicate correction packets, as will be discussed in greater detail herein.

In the event a feedback link completely breaks down for some reason, the multi-bit feedback protocol can fall back to ARQ due to retransmissions triggered by the Tx. That is, when a retransmission threshold is reached, the Tx can be configured to flush or reset and subsequently begin transmitting a new base packet/transmission. Similarly, any flush timeouts can result in a reset of the multi-bit feedback protocol. That is, the source and sink move on to the next base packet.

As noted, the multi-bit feedback protocols disclosed herein can be used to revert to ARQ in the middle of a feedback mode. In instances where a base packet is confused as a correction packet, a feedback protocol byte is added within the payload that indicates if the payload is either a base transmission or a correction packet. The feedback protocol byte is heavily coded and the Bluetooth protocol header can be used to validate the feedback protocol byte when needed.

In addition to using the feedback protocol byte verification above, additional verifications or confirmations can be used. For example, a received transmission can be compared to a previous transmission that is stored. This will help avoid confusing the base retransmissions as correction packets. In one example, if a base packet retransmission is requested due to a failed attempt to acquire the base packet. The Rx can request retransmission of this base packet. It is advantageous to be able to differentiate a retransmitted base packet from a correction packet.

A correction algorithm used in a correction phase may introduce additional errors due to retransmissions during the correction phase. In the correction phase, a correction payload is checked against one or more previously received correction payloads. Comparing correction payload ensures that already corrected bits are not re-corrected which would lead to a new error, or introduce additional errors into the base payload.

Another example issue may arise if there is a divergence in the correction algorithm and the source (Tx) decides that there is no further correction needed; however, the packet at the Rx has errors. In the correction phase, when there is a divergence between the source Tx and sink Rx in the base payloads, the multi-bit feedback protocol could enter an infinite loop where the source and sink cannot agree on a payload. This can be identified by either having a time out (expiration of a timer) or by introducing short correction packets that cannot be resolved. Once identified, the feedback system is flushed and restarted. The base payload can be retransmitted again without acknowledging the previous base packet.

FIG. 3 is a flowchart of an example method of the present disclosure. In general, the method involves automatic reversion to ARQ during a multi-bit feedback protocol. The method can begin with a step 302 of receiving a data packet comprising a payload. The payload has a feedback protocol byte that indicates that the payload is a base transmission rather than a correction transmission. In this particular method, it can be assumed that the payload has at least one error. In some instances, the data packet is stored when the data packet is determined to be a base transmission.

The method can include a step 304 of correcting, by a sink, an error in a data packet using a feedback protocol. As noted above, the data packet is transmitted over a wireless link to the sink by a source. The method can also include a step 306 of determining that the multi-bit feedback protocol has failed. The multi-bit feedback protocol can fail for any number of reasons such as when the source and sink cannot align on the payload being error-free or not. The method can include a step 308 of reverting back to an automatic repeat request protocol when the multi-bit feedback protocol has failed. Thus, any time an intractable error is identified during a multi-bit feedback protocol, the system can revert automatically to ARQ.

In one embodiment, the method includes a step 310 of validating the feedback protocol byte using a protocol header of the data packet to prevent the data packet from being confused as the correction transmission.

FIG. 4 is a flowchart of an example multi-bit feedback protocol method. In one embodiment, the method includes a step 402 of determining that the data packet has an error. As noted above, the error can be detected using CRC, as an example. When the error is detected, the method can include a step 404 of transmitting a no-acknowledgment to the source. The method can include a step 406 of receiving a correction packet from the source, as well as a step 408 of decoding the correction packet. Once decoded, the method includes a step 410 of correcting the error in the data packet using a correction algorithm. It will be understood that the correction algorithm can be executed over a stored data packet.

In some embodiments, the method can include a step 412 of comparing the correction packet against a previously stored correction packet to prevent a re-correction of a prior correction to the error or introduction additional errors into the data packet.

FIG. 5 is a flowchart of another example method involving determining divergences payloads of data packets and correcting for the same. The method can include a step 502 of determining a divergence in the payload. This divergence is due to an error in a correction algorithm used to correct the error in the data packet. When divergence is detected, the method can identify additional multi-bit feedback protocol behaviors and take action. For example, the method can include a step 504 of identifying the expiration of a timer as additional correction packets are transmitted to the sink. In this example, correction packets can be resent as long as the timer has not expired. It will be understood that rather than using a timer, a message count can also be used. For example, the Tx may be allowed to retransmit additional correction packets before hitting a stop. When a timer or count is used, the method can include a step 506 of retransmitting the base transmission at the expiration of the timer or count.

In another embodiment, after the divergence has been determined in step 502, the method can include a step 508 of determining when additional correction packets that are transmitted by the source are unresolvable. These correction packets may be unresolvable because they are intentionally short. That is, the Tx is now introducing and transmitting short correction packets that cannot be resolved in order to break the multi-bit feedback protocol loop. The method can then move to step 506 of retransmitting the base transmission when the additional correction packets are unresolvable.

The method can include a step 510 of flushing a source to prevent transmission of more of the additional correction packets when any of the additional correction packets that are transmitted by the source are unresolvable or a timer/count has expired. Once flushed, the source can transmit a new base packet/transmission in step 512.

In general, the methods and systems herein can revert from a multi-bit feedback protocol to an automatic repeat request protocol upon failure of the feedback protocol and when any one or more occurs: (1) a data packet is confused as a correction transmission when the data packet is a base transmission; (2) a correction phase for correcting an error in the data packet introduces additional errors; and/or (3) a divergence in a correction algorithm occurs during the multi-bit feedback protocol being implemented.

FIG. 6 is a diagrammatic representation of an example machine in the form of a computer system 1, within which a set of instructions for causing the machine to perform any one or more of the methodologies discussed herein may be executed. In various example embodiments, the machine operates as a standalone device or may be connected (e.g., networked) to other machines. In a networked deployment, the machine may operate in the capacity of a server or a client machine in a server-client network environment, or as a peer machine in a peer-to-peer (or distributed) network environment. The machine may be an Internet-of-Things device or system, a personal computer (PC), a tablet PC, a set-top box (STB), a personal digital assistant (PDA), a cellular telephone, a portable music player (e.g., a portable hard drive audio device such as a Moving Picture Experts Group Audio Layer 3 (MP3) player), a web appliance, a network router, switch or bridge, or any machine capable of executing a set of instructions (sequential or otherwise) that specify actions to be taken by that machine. Further, while only a single machine is illustrated, the term “machine” shall also be taken to include any collection of machines that individually or jointly execute a set (or multiple sets) of instructions to perform any one or more of the methodologies discussed herein.

The computer system 1 includes a processor or multiple processor(s) 5 (e.g., a central processing unit (CPU), a graphics processing unit (GPU), or both), and a main memory 10 and static memory 15, which communicate with each other via a bus 20. The computer system 1 may further include a video display 35 (e.g., a liquid crystal display (LCD)). The computer system 1 may also include an alpha-numeric input device(s) 30 (e.g., a keyboard), a cursor control device (e.g., a mouse), a voice recognition or biometric verification unit (not shown), a drive unit 37 (also referred to as disk drive unit), a signal generation device 40 (e.g., a speaker), and a network interface device 45. The computer system 1 may further include a data encryption module (not shown) to encrypt data.

The drive unit 37 includes a computer or machine-readable medium 50 on which is stored one or more sets of instructions and data structures (e.g., instructions 55) embodying or utilizing any one or more of the methodologies or functions described herein. The instructions 55 may also reside, completely or at least partially, within the main memory 10 and/or within the processor(s) 5 during execution thereof by the computer system 1. The main memory 10 and the processor(s) 5 may also constitute machine-readable media.

The instructions 55 may further be transmitted or received over a network via the network interface device 45 utilizing any one of a number of well-known transfer protocols (e.g., Hyper Text Transfer Protocol (HTTP)). While the machine-readable medium 50 is shown in an example embodiment to be a single medium, the term “computer-readable medium” should be taken to include a single medium or multiple media (e.g., a centralized or distributed database and/or associated caches and servers) that store the one or more sets of instructions. The term “computer-readable medium” shall also be taken to include any medium that is capable of storing, encoding, or carrying a set of instructions for execution by the machine and that causes the machine to perform any one or more of the methodologies of the present application, or that is capable of storing, encoding, or carrying data structures utilized by or associated with such a set of instructions. The term “computer-readable medium” shall accordingly be taken to include, but not be limited to, solid-state memories, optical and magnetic media, and carrier wave signals. Such media may also include, without limitation, hard disks, floppy disks, flash memory cards, digital video disks, random access memory (RAM), read only memory (ROM), and the like. The example embodiments described herein may be implemented in an operating environment comprising software installed on a computer, in hardware, or in a combination of software and hardware.

The components provided in the computer system 1 are those typically found in computer systems that may be suitable for use with embodiments of the present disclosure and are intended to represent a broad category of such computer components that are well known in the art. Thus, the computer system 1 can be an Internet-of-Things device or system, a personal computer (PC), hand held computer system, telephone, mobile computer system, workstation, tablet, phablet, mobile phone, server, minicomputer, mainframe computer, wearable, or any other computer system. The computer may also include different bus configurations, networked platforms, multi-processor platforms, and the like. Various operating systems may be used including UNIX, LINUX, WINDOWS, MAC OS, PALM OS, QNX ANDROID, IOS, CHROME, TIZEN, and other suitable operating systems.

Some of the above-described functions may be composed of instructions that are stored on storage media (e.g., computer-readable medium). The instructions may be retrieved and executed by the processor. Some examples of storage media are memory devices, tapes, disks, and the like. The instructions are operational when executed by the processor to direct the processor to operate in accord with the technology. Those skilled in the art are familiar with instructions, processor(s), and storage media.

In some embodiments, the computer system 1 may be implemented as a cloud-based computing environment, such as a virtual machine operating within a computing cloud. In other embodiments, the computer system 1 may itself include a cloud-based computing environment, where the functionalities of the computer system 1 are executed in a distributed fashion. Thus, the computer system 1, when configured as a computing cloud, may include pluralities of computing devices in various forms, as will be described in greater detail below.

In general, a cloud-based computing environment is a resource that typically combines the computational power of a large grouping of processors (such as within web servers) and/or that combines the storage capacity of a large grouping of computer memories or storage devices. Systems that provide cloud-based resources may be utilized exclusively by their owners or such systems may be accessible to outside users who deploy applications within the computing infrastructure to obtain the benefit of large computational or storage resources.

The cloud is formed, for example, by a network of web servers that comprise a plurality of computing devices, such as the computer system 1, with each server (or at least a plurality thereof) providing processor and/or storage resources. These servers manage workloads provided by multiple users (e.g., cloud resource customers or other users). Typically, each user places workload demands upon the cloud that vary in real-time, sometimes dramatically. The nature and extent of these variations typically depends on the type of business associated with the user.

It is noteworthy that any hardware platform suitable for performing the processing described herein is suitable for use with the technology. The terms “computer-readable storage medium” and “computer-readable storage media” as used herein refer to any medium or media that participate in providing instructions to a CPU for execution. Such media can take many forms, including, but not limited to, non-volatile media, volatile media and transmission media. Non-volatile media include, for example, optical or magnetic disks, such as a fixed disk. Volatile media include dynamic memory, such as system RAM. Transmission media include coaxial cables, copper wire and fiber optics, among others, including the wires that comprise one embodiment of a bus. Transmission media can also take the form of acoustic or light waves, such as those generated during radio frequency (RF) and infrared (IR) data communications, as well as wireless communications (both short-range and long-range). Common forms of computer-readable media include, for example, a floppy disk, a flexible disk, a hard disk, magnetic tape, any other magnetic medium, a CD-ROM disk, digital video disk (DVD), any other optical medium, any other physical medium with patterns of marks or holes, a RAM, a PROM, an EPROM, an EEPROM, a FLASHEPROM, any other memory chip or data exchange adapter, a carrier wave, or any other medium from which a computer can read.

Various forms of computer-readable media may be involved in carrying one or more sequences of one or more instructions to a CPU for execution. A bus carries the data to system RAM, from which a CPU retrieves and executes the instructions. The instructions received by system RAM can optionally be stored on a fixed disk either before or after execution by a CPU.

Computer program code for carrying out operations for aspects of the present technology may be written in any combination of one or more programming languages, including an object oriented programming language such as Java, Smalltalk, C++ or the like and conventional procedural programming languages, such as the “C” programming language or similar programming languages. The program code may execute entirely on the user's computer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone software package, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote computer or entirely on the remote computer or server. In the latter scenario, the remote computer may be connected to the user's computer through any type of network, including a local area network (LAN) or a wide area network (WAN), or the connection may be made to an external computer (for example, through the Internet using an Internet Service Provider).

The foregoing detailed description includes references to the accompanying drawings, which form a part of the detailed description. The drawings show illustrations in accordance with exemplary embodiments. These example embodiments, which are also referred to herein as “examples,” are described in enough detail to enable those skilled in the art to practice the present subject matter. The embodiments can be combined, other embodiments can be utilized, or structural, logical, and electrical changes can be made without departing from the scope of what is claimed. The following detailed description is, therefore, not to be taken in a limiting sense, and the scope is defined by the appended claims and their equivalents.

In this document, the terms “a” or “an” are used, as is common in patent documents, to include one or more than one. In this document, the term “or” is used to refer to a nonexclusive “or,” such that “A or B” includes “A but not B,” “B but not A,” and “A and B,” unless otherwise indicated. Furthermore, all publications, patents, and patent documents referred to in this document are incorporated by reference herein in their entirety, as though individually incorporated by reference. In the event of inconsistent usages between this document and those documents so incorporated by reference, the usage in the incorporated reference(s) should be considered supplementary to that of this document; for irreconcilable inconsistencies, the usage in this document controls.

The corresponding structures, materials, acts, and equivalents of all means or step plus function elements in the claims below are intended to include any structure, material, or act for performing the function in combination with other claimed elements as specifically claimed. The description of the present technology has been presented for purposes of illustration and description, but is not intended to be exhaustive or limited to the invention in the form disclosed. Many modifications and variations will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art without departing from the scope and spirit of the invention. Exemplary embodiments were chosen and described in order to best explain the principles of the present technology and its practical application, and to enable others of ordinary skill in the art to understand the invention for various embodiments with various modifications as are suited to the particular use contemplated.

While various embodiments have been described above, it should be understood that they have been presented by way of example only, and not limitation. The descriptions are not intended to limit the scope of the technology to the particular forms set forth herein. Thus, the breadth and scope of a preferred embodiment should not be limited by any of the above-described exemplary embodiments. It should be understood that the above description is illustrative and not restrictive. To the contrary, the present descriptions are intended to cover such alternatives, modifications, and equivalents as may be included within the spirit and scope of the technology as defined by the appended claims and otherwise appreciated by one of ordinary skill in the art. The scope of the technology should, therefore, be determined not with reference to the above description, but instead should be determined with reference to the appended claims along with their full scope of equivalents.

Claims

1. A method comprising:

correcting, by a sink, an error in a data packet using a multi-bit feedback protocol, the multi-bit feedback protocol involving generation and transmission of error bits identified in the data packet, the data packet being transmitted over a wireless link to the sink by a source, the correcting further comprising: generating and transmitting an index of an error correction, the index comprising positions of the error bits in the data packet that require flipping; and flipping the error bits in the data packet according to the positions in the index;
determining that the multi-bit feedback protocol has failed; and
reverting back to an automatic repeat request protocol when the multi-bit feedback protocol has failed.

2. The method according to claim 1, further comprising receiving the data packet comprising a payload having a feedback protocol byte, the feedback protocol byte indicating that the payload is a base transmission rather than a correction transmission.

3. The method according to claim 2, further comprising validating the feedback protocol byte using a protocol header of the data packet to prevent the data packet from being confused as the correction transmission.

4. The method according to claim 3, wherein the multi-bit feedback protocol comprises:

determining that the data packet has the error;
transmitting a no-acknowledgment to the source when the error is determined;
receiving a correction packet from the source;
decoding the correction packet; and
correcting the error in the data packet using a correction algorithm, the correction algorithm being executed over a stored data packet.

5. The method according to claim 4, further comprising comparing the correction packet against a previously stored correction packet to prevent a re-correction of a prior correction to the error or introduction additional errors into the data packet.

6. The method according to claim 4, further comprising:

determining a divergence in the payload, which is due to an error in a correction algorithm used to correct the error in the data packet;
identifying expiration of a timer as additional correction packets are transmitted to the sink; and
retransmitting the base transmission at the expiration of the timer.

7. The method according to claim 4, further comprising:

determining a divergence in the payload, which is due to an error in a correction algorithm used to correct the error in the data packet;
determining when additional correction packets that are transmitted by the source are unresolvable; and
retransmitting the base transmission when the additional correction packets are unresolvable.

8. The method according to claim 7, further comprising flushing the source to prevent transmission more of the additional correction packets when any of the additional correction packets that are transmitted by the source are unresolvable.

9. The method according to claim 1, further comprising retaining the data packet as a stored data packet when the data packet is determined to be a base transmission.

10. The method of claim 1, wherein the data packet is stored when the data packet is determined to be a base transmission.

11. A device comprising:

a processor; and
a memory for storing executable instructions, the processor executing the instructions to:
correct, by a sink, an error in a data packet using a multi-bit feedback protocol, the multi-bit feedback protocol involving generation and transmission of error bits identified in the data packet, the data packet being transmitted over a wireless link to the sink by a source, the correcting further comprising: generating and transmitting an index of an error correction, the index comprising positions of the error bits in the data packet that require flipping; and flipping the error bits in the data packet according to the positions in the index;
determine that the multi-bit feedback protocol has failed; and
revert back to an automatic repeat request protocol when the multi-bit feedback protocol has failed.

12. The device according to claim 11, wherein the processor is configured to receive the data packet comprising a payload having a feedback protocol byte, the feedback protocol byte indicating that the payload is a base transmission rather than a correction transmission.

13. The device according to claim 12, wherein the processor is configured to validate the feedback protocol byte using a protocol header of the data packet to prevent the data packet from being confused as the correction transmission.

14. The device according to claim 13, wherein the multi-bit feedback protocol comprises:

determining that the data packet has the error;
transmitting a no-acknowledgment to the source when the error is determined;
receiving a correction packet from the source;
decoding the correction packet; and
correcting the error in the data packet using a correction algorithm, the correction algorithm being executed over a stored data packet.

15. The device according to claim 14, further comprising comparing the correction packet against a previously stored correction packet to prevent a re-correction of a prior correction to the error or introduction of additional errors into the data packet.

16. The device according to claim 15, wherein the processor is configured to:

determine a divergence in the payload, which is due to an error in a correction algorithm used to correct the error in the data packet;
identify expiration of a timer as additional correction packets are transmitted to the sink; and
retransmit the base transmission at the expiration of the timer.

17. The device according to claim 15, wherein the processor is configured to:

determine a divergence in the payload, which is due to an error in a correction algorithm used to correct the error in the data packet;
determine when additional correction packets that are transmitted by the source are unresolvable; and
retransmit the base transmission when the additional correction packets are unresolvable.

18. The device according to claim 17, wherein the source is configured to flush to prevent transmission more of the additional correction packets when any of the additional correction packets that are transmitted by the source are unresolvable.

19. The device according to claim 18, wherein the processor is configured to retain the data packet as a stored data packet when the data packet is determined to be the base transmission.

20. A method comprising: correcting, by a sink, an error in a data packet using a multi-bit feedback protocol, the multi-bit feedback protocol involving generation and transmission of error bits identified in the data packet, the data packet being transmitted over a wireless link to the sink by a source, the correcting further comprising: generating and transmitting an index of an error correction, the index comprising positions of the error bits in the data packet that require flipping; and flipping the error bits in the data packet according to the positions in the index; correcting the data packet using a correction algorithm, the correction algorithm being executed over a stored data packet; determining any of: expiration of a timer as additional correction packets are transmitted to the sink; and when additional correction packets that are transmitted by the source are unresolvable; and retransmitting a base transmission when the additional correction packets are unresolvable or the timer has expired; determining that the multi-bit feedback protocol has failed; and reverting back to an automatic repeat request protocol when the multi-bit feedback protocol has failed.

21. A method comprising: correcting, by a sink, an error in a data packet using a multi-bit feedback protocol, the multi-bit feedback protocol involving generation and transmission of error bits identified in the data packet, the data packet being transmitted over a wireless link to the sink by a source, the correcting further comprising: generating and transmitting an index of an error correction, the index comprising positions of the error bits in the data packet that require flipping; and flipping the error bits in the data packet according to the positions in the index; reverting from the multi-bit feedback protocol to an automatic repeat request protocol upon failure of the multi-bit feedback protocol and when at least one of the following occurs: the data packet is confused as a correction transmission when the data packet is a base transmission; a correction phase for correcting an error in the data packet introduces additional errors; and a divergence in a correction algorithm occurs.

Referenced Cited
U.S. Patent Documents
5022029 June 4, 1991 Guichon
5657325 August 12, 1997 Lou
5910182 June 8, 1999 Dent
5968197 October 19, 1999 Doiron
6126310 October 3, 2000 Osthoff
6418549 July 9, 2002 Ramchandran
6505253 January 7, 2003 Chiu
6523068 February 18, 2003 Beser et al.
7016658 March 21, 2006 Kim et al.
7124205 October 17, 2006 Craft et al.
7447234 November 4, 2008 Colas et al.
7664883 February 16, 2010 Craft et al.
7848350 December 7, 2010 Inamdar
7971131 June 28, 2011 Ordentilch
8223643 July 17, 2012 Wolfgang
8305963 November 6, 2012 Breau
8327232 December 4, 2012 Budampati et al.
8352830 January 8, 2013 Landschaft et al.
8437267 May 7, 2013 Amir et al.
8473821 June 25, 2013 Taghavi Nasrabadi et al.
8693406 April 8, 2014 Ahmadi
8990663 March 24, 2015 Liu et al.
10270564 April 23, 2019 Djukic et al.
10491569 November 26, 2019 Powell
10749594 August 18, 2020 O'Shea et al.
11088784 August 10, 2021 Gopalan et al.
11191049 November 30, 2021 Chandrasekher et al.
11368250 June 21, 2022 Chandrasekher et al.
11368251 June 21, 2022 Chandrasekher et al.
20010030954 October 18, 2001 Hameleers
20020026523 February 28, 2002 Mallory et al.
20020054608 May 9, 2002 Wan
20020122510 September 5, 2002 Yakhnich et al.
20030215029 November 20, 2003 Limberg
20040049725 March 11, 2004 Golitschek
20040170120 September 2, 2004 Reunamaki et al.
20050094561 May 5, 2005 Raaf
20050208897 September 22, 2005 Lyons
20060021040 January 26, 2006 Boulanger
20060047862 March 2, 2006 Shearer et al.
20060268996 November 30, 2006 Sethi et al.
20070168197 July 19, 2007 Vasilache
20080002688 January 3, 2008 Kim et al.
20080002790 January 3, 2008 Itoh
20080126824 May 29, 2008 Lee et al.
20080225735 September 18, 2008 Qiu
20080250299 October 9, 2008 Maillet et al.
20090086711 April 2, 2009 Capretta et al.
20090119566 May 7, 2009 Hiromitsu
20090276686 November 5, 2009 Liu et al.
20100037270 February 11, 2010 Bennet
20100103830 April 29, 2010 Salgado et al.
20100165868 July 1, 2010 Gersemsky
20100192175 July 29, 2010 Bachet
20100202416 August 12, 2010 Wilhelmsson
20100262885 October 14, 2010 Cheng
20110131461 June 2, 2011 Schulz
20110206019 August 25, 2011 Zhai et al.
20110206065 August 25, 2011 Kim et al.
20110216787 September 8, 2011 Ai et al.
20110258519 October 20, 2011 Laevens et al.
20120300642 November 29, 2012 Abel et al.
20130018889 January 17, 2013 Jagmohan
20130132786 May 23, 2013 Tanigawa et al.
20130223203 August 29, 2013 Bai
20130250179 September 26, 2013 Lida
20130339036 December 19, 2013 Baeckstroem et al.
20140140342 May 22, 2014 Narad
20140241309 August 28, 2014 Hilton et al.
20150009902 January 8, 2015 Emmanuel
20160006842 January 7, 2016 Tahir
20160062954 March 3, 2016 Ruff
20160254881 September 1, 2016 Meylan
20170006616 January 5, 2017 Singh et al.
20170012799 January 12, 2017 Jiang
20170269876 September 21, 2017 Mukhopadhyay et al.
20180013808 January 11, 2018 Petry et al.
20180048567 February 15, 2018 Ignatchenko
20180101957 April 12, 2018 Talathi
20180167171 June 14, 2018 Wu
20180267850 September 20, 2018 Froelich et al.
20180288198 October 4, 2018 Pope et al.
20180314985 November 1, 2018 O'Shea
20180359811 December 13, 2018 Verzun et al.
20190028237 January 24, 2019 Pan et al.
20190037052 January 31, 2019 Deshpande
20190097680 March 28, 2019 O'Brien
20190097914 March 28, 2019 Zhong et al.
20190392266 December 26, 2019 Zhong et al.
20190393903 December 26, 2019 Mandt et al.
20200128279 April 23, 2020 Han et al.
20200177418 June 4, 2020 Hoydis et al.
20200213152 July 2, 2020 Choquette et al.
20200320371 October 8, 2020 Baker
20200383169 December 3, 2020 Takahashi et al.
20210014939 January 14, 2021 Verzun et al.
20210034846 February 4, 2021 Ko et al.
20210056058 February 25, 2021 Lee et al.
20210120440 April 22, 2021 Reimann et al.
20210319286 October 14, 2021 Gunduz
20210392033 December 16, 2021 Haartsen
20220045696 February 10, 2022 Boussard
20220114436 April 14, 2022 Gopalan et al.
20220132367 April 28, 2022 Liu et al.
20220209893 June 30, 2022 Chandrasekher et al.
20220209895 June 30, 2022 Chandrasekher et al.
20220209897 June 30, 2022 Jiang et al.
20220311542 September 29, 2022 Chandrasekher et al.
20220321260 October 6, 2022 Chandrasekher et al.
Foreign Patent Documents
106487610 March 2017 CN
2493081 January 2013 GB
Other references
  • Interview Agenda (Year: 2022).
  • Kim et al., “Deepcode: Feedback Codes via Deep Learning,” [online] Jul. 2, 2013 [retrieved on Apr. 17, 2020], Retrieved from the Internet: < URL:https://arxiv.org/abs/1807.00801v1>, 24 pages.
  • Gopalan et al., “Systems and Methods for Artificial Intelligence Discovered Codes”, U.S. Appl. No. 17/069,794, filed Oct. 13, 2020, Specification, Claims, Abstract, and Drawings, 43 pages.
  • Goutay et al., “Deep reinforcement learning autoencoder with noisy feedback.” 2019 International Symposium on Modeling and Optimization in Mobile, Ad Hoc, and Wireless Networks (WiOPT). IEEE, Jun. 24, 2019, 6 pages.
  • Yamamoto et al., “Application of Yamamoto-Itoh coding scheme to discrete memoryless broadcast channels.” 2017 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT). IEEE, 2017, 5 pages.
  • Aoudia et al., “End-to-end learning of communications systems without a channel model.” 2018 52nd Asilornar Conference on Signals, Systems, and Computers. IEEE, Dec. 5, 2018, 6 pages.
  • Duman et al., “On optimal power allocation for turbo codes.” Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory, IEEE, Jun. 29-Jul. 4, 1997, 1 page.
  • Arvinte et al., “Deep log-likelihood ratio quantization.” 2019 27th European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO). IEEE, 2019, 5 pages.
  • “International Search Report” and “Written Opinion”, Patent Cooperation Treaty Application No. PCT/US2021/054265, dated Nov. 24, 2021, 24 pages.
  • “International Search Report” and “Written Opinion”, Patent Cooperation Treaty Application PCT/US2021/0063356, dated Jan. 14, 2022, 9 pages.
  • “International Search Report” and “Written Opinion”, Patent Cooperation Treaty Application No. PCT/US2021/061902, dated Jan. 24, 2022, 11 pages.
  • Henze, Martin, “A Machine-Learning Packet-Classification Tool for Processing Corrupted Packets on End Hosts”, Diploma Thesis, Chair of Communication and Distributed Systems, RWTH Aachen University, Mar. 2011, 103 pages.
  • “International Search Report” and “Written Opinion”, Patent Cooperation Treaty Application No. PCT/US2021/06617, dated Mar. 11, 2022, 12 pages.
  • Kötter et al., “Coding for Errors and Erasures in Random Network Coding”, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 54.8; 3579-3591. Mar. 25, 2008; Retrieved on Feb. 19, 2022 (Feb. 19, 2022) from <https://arxiv.org/pdf/cs/0703061.pdf> entire document; 30 pages.
  • Grcar, Joseph, “How ordinary elimination became Gaussian elimination”, Historia Mathematica vol. 38 Issue 2, May 2011; Available online Sep. 28, 2010; pp. 163-218.
  • “International Search Report” and “Written Opinion”, Patent Cooperation Treaty Application No. PCT/US2021/064735, dated Mar. 17, 2022, 11 pages.
Patent History
Patent number: 11575469
Type: Grant
Filed: Dec 23, 2021
Date of Patent: Feb 7, 2023
Patent Publication Number: 20220209894
Assignee: Aira Technologies, Inc. (Saratoga, CA)
Inventors: Anand Chandrasekher (Saratoga, CA), RaviKiran Gopalan (Cupertino, CA), Sandeep Kesireddy (San Jose, CA), Arman Rahimzamani (San Jose, CA)
Primary Examiner: Cynthia Britt
Assistant Examiner: Dipakkumar B Gandhi
Application Number: 17/560,964
Classifications
Current U.S. Class: Data Formatting To Improve Error Detection Correction Capability (714/701)
International Classification: H04L 1/00 (20060101); H04L 9/00 (20220101);